Mailing-List: contact new-httpd-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 10:22:50 -0800 (PST)
From: rbb@covalent.net
To: new-httpd@apache.org
Subject: Re: beta?
In-Reply-To: <m366j0oo7d.fsf@adsl-77-241-65.rdu.bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0101271021010.14366-100000@koj>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


> > Remember that 99% of the changes that have been committed in the last two
> > weeks, were changes to make the server ready for beta.  We are essentially
> > in feature freeze, so unless a feature is necessary, for performance, or
> > protocol correctness, or just so that people can actually write handlers
> > and filters, the code should not be committed.  
> 
> that is no feature freeze :)  many if not most features fit that
> description in some way or another
> 
> I just think that deferring new features, however useful, until after
> b1 will move us more quickly towards the point where more people will
> use apache 2.0 and we will begin finding the sorts of problems which
> we can't find ourselves.

I understand that, but remember, that these features, and things that
people said we couldn't go beta without.  Dean and Bill said we couldn't
go beta with the ap_r* performance we had.  We absolutely can't go beta
with seg faults whenever we make byterange requests.  I would prefer if we
didn't go beta if people can't write useful modules.

I agree there are minimal things that don't fit into those categories, but
I still think those are the things we want to allow in while we move
towards beta.

Ryan

_______________________________________________________________________________
Ryan Bloom                        	rbb@apache.org
406 29th St.
San Francisco, CA 94131
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------